by Kaharz » Sun May 13, 2012 1:12 pm
Sandwiches wrote:In Britain you get a gun license if you have a gun. But you can't get a gun without a gun license.
They more less tried the same catch 22 in the US with the Marijuana [sic] Tax Act. Basically you could possess marijuana under federal law if you had a tax stamp. If you didn't have the tax stamp, you could get 5 years and a $2000 fine. However, most states had criminal laws regarding the possession of marijuana, so getting the tax stamp would force you to incriminate yourself at the state level. It was eventually overturned by the Supreme Court for being unconstitutional do to the whole self incrimination and then repealed and replaced by criminal law a year or so later.
Actually marriage licenses were instituted to "protect" white women from marrying black men. Not so much even the other way around.
Not exactly, at least in the US. Marriage licenses were originally not required in the US (just registration) and cohabitation was generally enough to prove the existence of a valid marriage (common law). After the civil war, many states started requiring actual government issued licenses and by the early 20th century most of the states had prohibitions against a whole host of what they believed were improper marriages. Including marriage of whites to non-whites,* marriages to alcoholics or addicts, marriages to people with developmental disability or psychological disorders, and divorced people remarrying. Most of those were completely struck down by the courts after a few decades.
*Perhaps it was easier for a white man to obtain a license to marry a non-white in some states, then it was for a white woman, I don't know. I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case. But many states didn't specify and listed a whole host of other races that whites couldn't marry.[quote="Sandwiches"]In Britain you get a gun license if you have a gun. But you can't get a gun without a gun license.[/quote]
They more less tried the same catch 22 in the US with the Marijuana [sic] Tax Act. Basically you could possess marijuana under federal law if you had a tax stamp. If you didn't have the tax stamp, you could get 5 years and a $2000 fine. However, most states had criminal laws regarding the possession of marijuana, so getting the tax stamp would force you to incriminate yourself at the state level. It was eventually overturned by the Supreme Court for being unconstitutional do to the whole self incrimination and then repealed and replaced by criminal law a year or so later.
[quote]Actually marriage licenses were instituted to "protect" white women from marrying black men. Not so much even the other way around.[/quote]
Not exactly, at least in the US. Marriage licenses were originally not required in the US (just registration) and cohabitation was generally enough to prove the existence of a valid marriage (common law). After the civil war, many states started requiring actual government issued licenses and by the early 20th century most of the states had prohibitions against a whole host of what they believed were improper marriages. Including marriage of whites to non-whites,* marriages to alcoholics or addicts, marriages to people with developmental disability or psychological disorders, and divorced people remarrying. Most of those were completely struck down by the courts after a few decades.
[size=85]*Perhaps it was easier for a white man to obtain a license to marry a non-white in some states, then it was for a white woman, I don't know. I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case. But many states didn't specify and listed a whole host of other races that whites couldn't marry.[/size]